Blackberry vs iPhone

It's cool to buy an iphone in U.S., but I chose to be practical. A Blackberry pearl only costs less than US$100, while its email function is already enough for me. Several friends chose iPhone because of its stylish look. However, I believe blackberry has more operating experience than Apply on this area. (let me wait for another five years to buy the new-generation iphone after Apply gains more experience)

Speaking of blackberry's professional service, I would say one thing. I got annoyed one day after finding the web browser disappreared from my cellphone. I called the customer service twice, and tried every thing I could to solve it.(remember, I was once in the computer engineering major). But nothing works. So after the short discussion with the customer service tele person, I was connected to a techinical enginner based in east coast. It's already 7pm in my time zone, which means it's over 10pm in his time zone. He is very patient, and seems very confident on how to solve the problem. We have been talking on the phone for over one hour on how to set up new software(most of the time the line was holding during the setting up period). And the problem was solved finally. It is really interesting to see Blackberry has real enginneers to support individual users. More importantly, the service seems works 24 hours.

It reminds me of China's cell phone market. The service quality is hardly assured, while most of the companies only compete on the price. That strategy will not last longer, I firmly believe. The service is what people depend on, and the reason I chose blackberry.

Facebook course offered in Stanford

Believe it or not?? Stanford does have such a new course now, and sounds very interesting.

China's VoIP deal

FierceIP reported a piece on the VoIP deal between a Indiana firm and two Chinese companies. It will be interesting to see its future, and how the big telecom elephants are going to respond to this...

A telecom service and equipment firm based in Indianapolis has cut a deal to sell its VoIP service in China. InteleCom Solutions said it signed a letter of intent with two Chinese companies for sales and distribution.

Panda International and Shanghai NIU Telecom agreed to market InteleCom service and equipment in China. Together, the two Chinese telecoms comprise 372 million landlines, 508 mobile users and 170 Internet subscribers, InteleCom's chairman, John Roberts said. All 1.1 billion are potential VoIP customers, he said. (One research firm pegged the Chinese VoIP market at 144 million paying users in four years. China, in turn, is expected to turn out 35 million VoIP phones this year.)

InteleCom previously cut an equipment distribution deal with Sakal Group, the largest privately owned retail chain in Israel. That deal put 21,000 InteleCom VoIP phones in Sakal's 80 retail stores and 800 wholesale points-of-sale. InteleCom clearly has a plan for world VoIP domination through the clever use of alliances.

too risky to invest in China's digital TV stock

China Digital TV Holding is planning a listing in New York Stock Exchange. It's not a big company, from my research, though the name sounds big. I would say it's risky to invest in China's digital TV market now, especially in a digital TV card maker like China Digital TV, since the policy of standard and regulation hasn't really confirmed yet and it could be changed anytime. Even China Digital admits this in its SEC filing, saying that "its business will suffer if we do not respond effectively to technological or commercial changes in our industry."I believe the company wants to catch up as the first digital-concept stock in NYSE, but I would say better to be a little conserved before everything becomes less obscure.

P.S. I am moving to California now. I start to think if I should chang to another blog or change the blog name to Amy_in a crazy california or Crazy Amy in california. Let me know your good ideas.

Google and AP, good move

Google succeeded in bringing four news agnecies, AP, AFP, U.K. news agency the Press Association, and the Canandian press, as online partners. If you pay attention, you could find Google already categorized the content from four partners to links such as the ap.google.com, afp.google.com and ukpress.google.com. You couldn't open this link directly, but have to through the deeper links such as this AFP piece. I bet there is the commercial agreement to share the revenue, but it is a good way for those agencies to live and expand their audience pool. For people crticize Google's possible-violation of copyright protection, I would say they should find a way to develop along with the technology advance, instead of trying to kill the new tech in its infant age. As you may know, Russia was a typical loser during the Cold War when it forbidden people using phones. Not it takes time to catch up.